Religious purpose exclusion versus charitable purpose: non overriding religious objects do not attract Explanation 3, registration directed under sect...
Search-assessment proviso jurisdiction, time-barred valuation reports, and denial of cross-examination vitiate valuation-based and confession-based ad...
Proceeds of crime: provisional attachment confirmed; equivalent value attachment and acquisition date fair market value upheld, Covid exclusion preser...
The dominant issue was whether an assessment framed for FY 2024-2025 pursuant to a show cause notice issued under s.74, instead of the applicable s.74A, was legally sustainable. The Court held that issuance of the notice and consequential assessment under s.74 lacked authority of law where s.74A governed the period; therefore, the assessment order was set aside. To avoid futile remand and limitation complications, the Court directed that the existing notice be treated as a notice under s.74A, required the taxpayer to file a reply on that basis, and ordered adjudication afresh on merits. - HC
The dominant issue was whether an assessment framed for FY 2024-2025 pursuant to a show cause notice issued under s.74, instead of the applicable s.74A, was legally sustainable. The Court held that issuance of the notice and consequential assessment under s.74 lacked authority of law where s.74A governed the period; therefore, the assessment order was set aside. To avoid futile remand and limitation complications, the Court directed that the existing notice be treated as a notice under s.74A, required the taxpayer to file a reply on that basis, and ordered adjudication afresh on merits. - HC
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
